Tim Pool exposes Virginia Democrats' "insanely evil" redistricting scheme to create five Arlington districts, eliminating Republican representation for a 10-to-1 Democratic advantage. He refutes claims that counting undocumented immigrants drives apportionment gains, noting data shows only a net increase of one to four seats in urban hubs like Fairfax County. Pool proposes Trump's "nuclear option" of restoring Arlington to D.C. as the sole remedy, arguing current tactics fuel hyperpolarization where might makes right rather than democratic fairness. Ultimately, this partisan manipulation silences moderates and entrenches extreme policies across the nation. [Automatically generated summary]
The dream of the American Democratic election is over, my friends.
What we have now is not the popular choice, but the procedural one.
In Virginia today, a vote is happening to redistrict the state in a way that is insanely evil.
It's the only way I can describe it.
It would put five congressional districts in one city, which seems to make literally no sense.
The goal of which is to add two to four.
New Democrat seats to Congress in DC.
Now, I can already hear many Democrats saying, yes, but Republicans started in Texas.
I'll give you that one.
It was countered by Democrats in California, but this would put them over the edge.
Now, the reason why I say this is so egregious is that when you take a look at redistricting efforts in the red states, it wasn't so overt that they would put five congressional seats in one city like they're doing in Virginia.
And more importantly, there's a bigger issue at play with Democrats already having.
Extra seats due to illegal immigration.
So, if the response to massive illegal immigration granting Democrats extra seats is Republicans saying we are going to redistrict and make districts that fit more fairly in our state, Democrats get upset and counter.
What we have is a tit for tat where from the get go, Democrats have been getting extra electoral college votes and congressional seats in the states where they protect illegal immigration.
Now, listen.
I'll try to be fair.
Everybody is playing some dirty game.
Politics is a dirty game.
And Republicans get no special benefits from me.
The reality is, we do not have popular votes anymore.
We have procedural votes, which means all that really matters to either political party is can they justify getting a higher number than the other person at the end of the day?
Now, Trump has a nuclear option.
Many are now advocating and have been for some time for DC to reclaim Arlington.
And I'm going to go ahead and say outside of any of the politicking, they should.
D.C. was initially a square.
It was intended to be a federal jurisdiction free from the influence of outside states.
But we decided to cut off a huge chunk and turn it into an almost square.
Thus, Arlington became part of Virginia.
But it is supposed to be a square federal jurisdiction.
So the federal government can operate without any other state imposing its will upon it.
By carving out Arlington, we failed to do just that.
And so it makes no sense.
Now, I would argue we should restore the square back to DC.
This would inhibit much of the redistricting scheme we're seeing in Virginia.
And to the benefit of Democrats, it would make Washington, DC, a federal jurisdiction, massively more Democrat.
I mean, it's already very Democrat.
Putting Arlington into DC makes a ton of Democrats become.
It's not clear cut that this nuclear option Trump might actually activate is going to be a net benefit in the long run, but functionally, it's what should be, and it should never have changed in the first place.
So, let's take a look at a couple things here the breakdown of the map, who's right and who's wrong, and whether or not.
I mean, guys, I just got to say it like this.
The end is nigh.
The fact that this vote is happening right now in Virginia, it just means that we are done debating.
We are now at the phase in whatever you want to call what's going on.
We're at the point where we're arguing to seize land and eliminate the voices of half the state.
You see, Virginia, it's about, I think, what, 52% Democrat.
And the current makeup, I could be getting the numbers wrong, but I believe it's around half, slightly more.
It's a purple state.
Then a Republican governor for a while, now a Democrat.
Around half the state is about Democrat, and they want to make every congressional district but one Democrat.
That would be eliminating the voices of those that are conservative in the state.
Let's break down exactly what's going on with this vote by the time you're watching this.
Some of you, it may have already concluded, but we're going to break this down for you all watching live now at 4 p.m.
Before we do, my friends, we've got a great sponsor it's ourselves, it's Casbrew.com.
Check out what we got, my friends.
We've got, check it out, influencers.
We got a bunch of different coffee from everybody you know and love.
Ian's Graphene Dream, low acidity.
Josie's 1776 signature brew.
Two weeks till Christmas, we got Mary S'mores, Seamus Coughlin, and Dr. Alex Stein's Big Booty Latina Love Potion.
He is not a doctor, by the way.
It's funny.
But I would always shout out our Appalachian Nights or Ian's Graphene Dream.
Guys, I gotta be honest, one of our best sellers.
It's low acidity.
So if you get a stomachache drinking too much coffee, some people do.
You can check out Ian's Graphene Dream, which is our second most popular coffee blend.
But let's jump to the news and get started here with the New York Times, proposed districts in Northern Virginia, how both parties are slicing urban areas to tilt the House.
Indeed, it's true that both parties are.
But I want to start with this tweet, actually, from Luke Rosiak, who says, Virginia Democrats say they aren't the bad guys.
They're just responding to a Texas gerrymandering.
But Texas's proposed map, plus 21%, is less of a gerrymander than the maps of California, Washington, and Maryland, and is similar to New York.
And this is the point that I was making in the intro.
The Republican redistricting is a response to what Democrats have already been doing.
To maintain their illicit edge, Democrats are trying to change it once again.
So you can take a look at this graph that he's showing.
Republicans are underrepresented, Democrats are overrepresented everywhere.
And don't get me started, I haven't even gotten to the illegal immigration question yet.
When the Republicans were in charge, they voluntarily held a vote to move to nonpartisan redistricting, which was passed by voters with two thirds support.
Now that Dems won by 1%, they're citing Texas as moral justification for undoing that map for a 10 to 1 pro Democrat map.
He says Virginia currently has mathematically perfect fair congressional maps 55% of the seats and 52% of the popular vote, close to parity as you can get with 11 seats.
Democrats are asking voters today whether actual ballot language.
They have created the lobster map with an urban tail of dense Democrat in Arlington to eliminate the entire section of Republican.
And that's just the beginning.
When you take a look at the actual map, we jump over to the New York Times, you can see that we've got one, two, three, four, five.
Holy crap.
Five congressional districts in Arlington.
Fairfax County, to be fair, because the 10th is a little outside of Arlington.
What they have done with this map, you can see in this tweet.
This district, stretching a tiny thin strip into Arlington, all of these districts connecting to Arlington in an effort to make five Democrat seats from what should be mixed areas.
They will eliminate all but one.
Republican district.
And Virginia is largely conservative leaning in the outskirts and even fairly moderate in many areas.
We are right here in the eastern panhandle of West Virginia, about 30 seconds to a minute to Loudoun County.
Well, to be fair, yeah, our studio is like a minute from Loudoun County and also Frederick County, which is like Winchester, and fairly moderate.
You'll find a mixed bag.
People aren't really fighting all that much.
They're not the deep culture wars, not like California or, say, you know, like Iowa, I guess.
This map will disenfranchise half the state.
That's evil.
That's wrong.
And they're doing it under the guise of Texas gerrymandering.
The only problem is that Democrats have long already done this.
I'd like to bring up Illinois for you.
The Illinois congressional districts.
It's a map that I love to show.
We love to show it to prove the point.
Let's zoom in.
Nope, let's not do that.
I don't want to download it.
I just want.
Okay, anyway, I'll do it.
I'm trying to zoom in.
It won't let me.
It won't let me zoom in.
Okay, thanks.
Well, this is good enough.
You can see it, right?
You take a look here at the 13th Congressional District combines Champaign, Springfield, and East St. Louis to create a Democrat district, slicing the 15th in half.
Because if they actually just said, these are the areas, your city is included in the rural area, they would be Republican.
The Illinois map is one of the most disgusting gerrymandered pieces of garbage.
Look at this one, 17.
Stretching from Bloomington, Peoria, wrapping around and connecting Rockford.
Why is Bloomington in the same congressional district as Rockford?
Because they're creating Democrat districts to cheat.
Here's the New York Times.
Here's how they frame it.
American cities, densely populated and overwhelmingly Democratic, are typically prime targets for aggressive gerrymanders.
This past year has been no different as urban areas become casualties of newly partisan maps drawn by both Republicans and Democrats in a rare bout of mid-decade redistricting.
With nearly 80% of the U.S. population living in urban areas, according to the census, mapmakers using modern data technology can surgically split cities block by block to eke out a partisan advantage.
They pack like minded voters into a single district or crack them.
So far this year, state lawmakers have carved up major Democratic cities in the nation wide ranging arms race, drawing new maps in five states.
We can take a look at this one.
This is Kansas City, Missouri, for instance.
Take Kansas City, Missouri.
Late last year, Governor Mike Cahoe signed into law a new map that would pave the way for eliminating a Democratic seat, netting a Republican one, potentially ousting a longtime rep, Emmanuel Cleaver, who was also the first black mayor of Kansas.
Look at this stupid thin strip that makes literally no sense other than for partisan power and control.
Turning this district into a Republican one.
Or at least that's the attempt.
The proposed map effectively slices apart or cracks the old 5th district, which previously held a majority of Democratic-dominated Kansas City and metropolitan area, into three parts.
Originally, you had a Democrat district and two strong Republicans.
Now you have three Republican districts.
As a result, Democratic voters in Kansas are spread out across three new districts.
Again, it's all just one big game.
But take a look at Virginia.
Oh boy, I'm excited.
This is probably the worst.
They say while Missouri illustrates how a single district can be cracked apart to dilute the votes, Virginia is taking a different approach.
Its proposed map spreads out Democrats from the crammed Northern Virginia suburbs into multiple districts, spreading more than 100 miles into deeply red areas for the opposite outcome, to tilt them blue.
Where it is right now, you've got the 8th, which is Alexandria, the 11th, Alexandria, the 10th, suburbs and outskirts of Alexandria, the 7th, south of Alexandria, and then the 6th, separate.
The new map combines five districts into just Alexandria to create.
Five new Democrat seats and eliminate the Republicans.
They say while there is no central city in Northern Virginia, Fairfax County, the state's largest municipality boasts 1.2 million but sprawls across 400 square miles.
The northern reaches of the state have population in the millions and are mostly Democratic.
Take a look at this.
So in this area, they're eliminating two strong Democrat seats and eliminating one Republican seat to create five kind of Democrat seats, which are, they're Dem plus eight, plus seven.
It's eliminating one Republican seat by getting rid of strong Democrat seats.
The argument, however, in favor of this, strong Democrat seats go far left.
The redistricting effort actually could force Democrats to somewhat moderate, as the Republicans in these districts will not vote for a lunatic.
So in the primaries, you might actually see a long term benefit.
I'd like to imagine that'd be the case.
But considering where we're going, I don't actually think so.
They highlight Houston, for instance.
In Houston, they have eliminated one Democrat seat for a Republican seat by shifting this into stronger Democrat seats.
The problem with this is the inverse.
You create entrenched communist areas.
All of this is bad.
I think we should largely have flat districts because you want Democrats to have to court Republicans or Republicans to court Democrats.
You want moderation.
This is, my friends, functional and political hyperpolarization, and it's only going to get worse.
The New York Times had this article also from today.
Virginia voting today on a map that could hand four House seats to Democrats.
The problem with everything we have, first, this is hyperpolarization, as I've mentioned.
By creating new Republican seats, you are basically saying in Congress, you are going to have far left and far right, and they will never agree.
That's what Virginia is doing right now by creating all these districts, by shifting them.
The potential argument, as I just mentioned, is that by diluting the strong Democrat seats into weak Democrat seats to kick out the Republicans, you will end up with Democrats having to court some Republicans and moderating their position, which some Republicans might actually find somewhat more acceptable.
But in Congress, they will vote in lockstep.
The same is true for Republican districts.
So in Congress, they're going to vote for, you know, abortion at the point of birth, gun bans, things like that.
They may look more moderate on paper, or at least in the press, people like John Fetterman.
The end result will be.
In the votes, leadership will mandate wackaloon crazy policies.
Politico says Democrats brace for a close finish on Virginia redistricting effort.
They might not actually win, though.
If approved, the effort could deliver a 10 to 1 seat advantage.
Now, I want to show you some tweets we have.
I think Brad Todd says How do you rig an election?
You'll rig the question.
Look at the ballot asking Virginians to flip a 6D5R congressional map into 10D1R, breaking up every region of the Commonwealth.
The ballot says to restore fairness.
The question reads Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to allow the General Assembly to temporarily adopt new congressional districts to restore fairness in the upcoming elections while ensuring Virginia's standard redistricting process resumes for all future redistricting after the 2030 census?
Fairness.
I was in Virginia a couple weeks ago.
I mean, I'm in Virginia like every day, to be honest, because it's across the street.
You know, in the Eastern Panhandle, seriously, when you go to a restaurant, you drive to Virginia.
Crossing the state line is not that big of a deal.
We do it every single day.
Seriously.
The gas station, like our gas station, we're equally distant from a Virginia gas station and a West Virginia one.
So sometimes we'll go to Virginia.
I saw a commercial and it said that it did not mention redistricting.
It literally just said we should have fair elections.
And if you believe elections should be fair, vote yes on the proposed amendment.
It didn't explain anything about the national scale or stage, it didn't explain anything about eliminating Republican seats.
It just said, should things be fair?
Then you know what?
Dumb people, they're going to go in and they're going to say yes.
I want to show you this.
Let's break down the argument who is right and who is wrong.
I'm not a big fan of the Republican Party.
I think they're largely do nothing and they're stodgy squares, suit wearing, and lacking charisma.
You heard me, Republicans.
It's true and everyone knows it.
Democrats, on the other hand, are unrepentant and steal power for personal and political gain, even at the expense of the working class.
You heard it, Democrats.
At least you got rock stars on your side and actors, though it is kind of changing.
Third way, which is funny because some use third way as a reference to like neo fascism and communism, but they said, is illegal immigration really a Democratic plot to sway congressional apportionment?
I made the point for some time, my friends.
It is not about illegal immigrants voting.
Republicans are wrong about this.
They say Democrats bring in illegal immigrants, the illegal immigrants then vote, and that's how they steal elections.
They state In this paper, we surveyed the academic research and found the answer is no.
Illegal immigration is responsible for between zero and one additional Democratic representatives in the House based on the 2020 census.
Oh, thank God.
For a second there, I thought Democrats were cheating.
By bringing in massive amounts of illegal immigration, offering sanctuary city and state status, and then counting them in the decennial census process to get extra seats.
But don't worry, they said no.
I was worried for a second.
Okay, well, let's break down how they said no.
And I'm wondering if you can explain to me in the comments right now, chat it up, guys, exactly how they came to this conclusion.
Okay, how about this?
According to the Center for Immigration Studies, they state, Alabama projected seats in 2020 as six.
Without undocumented immigrants, it would be seven.
Thus, they have lost a seat.
California projected seats as 52.
Without illegals, 51.
Thus, they gain a seat.
As we can see from this, the end result is they have a net gain of about one seat, according to the Center for Immigration Studies.
Hmm, interesting.
It says Alabama would lose a seat, California would gain a seat, Minnesota loses a seat, New York gains a seat, Ohio loses a seat, Texas gains a seat.
So that means that in the end, It's a one seat advantage.
According to Pew, it's actually moot.
We can see that Alabama loses a seat, California and Florida each gain a seat, Minnesota and Ohio each lose a seat, Texas gains a seat.
So it's between zero and one, right?
It's not that big a deal.
Illegal immigrants play almost no role.
Now with the Electoral College, okay, all right.
Well, all right.
They say that in 2002, John Judas and Roy Teixeira authored The Emerging Democratic Majority, which argued, among other factors, that the increase of non white American citizens would give Democrats an enduring electoral advantage in the future.
This book was considered a roadmap for some Democrats and may have inadvertently given rise to the far right conspiracy theory that Democrats are trying to replace white people.
Well, what I will stress is that Democrats have largely just said that it's a benefit to them and they want more illegal immigrants because it does change the structure of the electoral process.
Now, my friends, have you figured it out?
I've let you stew on it a little bit.
Can you understand how this is manipulated information to mislead people?
I largely do blame the Center for Immigration Studies for misunderstanding.
That's fair and that's fine.
The third way then says if one state would lose a seat and one state would gain a seat, it's moot, meaning Democrats get a zero advantage.
Congressional seats are not by state, they're by district.
And when districts are drawn up around urban centers where illegal immigrants largely are, Democrats get a massive advantage.
I'm going to do this.
I didn't plan this in advance.
I'm going to pull this up and just say how many illegal immigrants are in Fairfax County, Virginia?
Let's figure it out.
I'm sure there's not that many, right?
Grok is churning away.
It's browsing a bunch of different government websites right now, and I'm patterning as it calculates 102,000 unauthorized, undocumented illegal immigrants living in the combined area of Fairfax County.
This means when you are trying to apportion a congressional seat, you get 100,000 extra people in an urban area.
So when you are drafting up your congressional seats and you put them all cluttered around a city and create a bunch of Democrat districts, that is how you are cheating.
So I have this from Grok where I asked it How many congressional seats do blue states get extra due to illegal immigrants?
Blue states.
And it says between zero and two.
Okay, let's scroll down to the next question.
And I said, following up with this, it's not about the whole state, though.
It's about the district.
So if these illegal immigrants are centered in urban centers, Democrats get extra seats.
That's right.
Even in red states.
And there lies the point.
When they say that in Texas, it's a Republican state getting an extra seat, this means that Republicans get an extra seat and California, which is Democrat, gets an extra seat, then it's a moot point, isn't it?
No.
Because the extra seat in Texas is going to Austin.
Because that's where most illegal immigrants are.
So, an extra seat will emerge in the Austin area, creating a Democrat seat.
Now, you can make the argument for the Electoral College, because the state as a whole is going to vote where they're going, and a Democrat electoral voter in the Austin area will have to cast their ballot for the Republican.
But as far as Congress is concerned, breaking this up by state makes no sense.
If illegal immigrants are in urban centers, and then we draw an extra congressional seat, or the state gets an extra congressional seat, and they draw it.
In the Austin area, it's going to a Democrat.
So even red states gaining a seat does not mean Republicans are gaining extra seats.
That's the lie.
And what does Grok say?
Yeah, actually, you're right.
When you are factoring in the fact that it's urban centers, you're looking at around a two to four seat redistribution.
Democrats will get an extra two to four seats because even in red states, that's where the illegal immigrants are going Democrat controlled areas.
Kansas City has an estimated 40,000 illegal immigrants.
So if the Republicans say, Centering a congressional district in an urban center because it has a dense population, because there's a lot of illegal immigrants, it stands to reason actually, we should gerrymander that district and reduce the influence of this district because we don't want to give them influence based on illegal immigration.
There is actually an argument to be made why it works for Republicans to gerrymander for that reason.
Democrats, on the other hand, what they're doing with Fairfax County seems to make literally no sense.
And congratulations on your lobster, the blue-tailed lobster district, which makes no sense at all.
And therein lies the big problem in the end.
Now, again, I don't think Republicans matter anyway.
What are they doing?
Are they passing the Save Act?
They're worthless.
The end result is it's the Harlem Globetrotters and the Washington Generals.
Republicans suck, get nothing done, and get trounced while Democrats steal power.
The longest time, Democrats have gotten extra seats near urban centers because of illegal immigrant populations.
Let's do New York City.
Let's do the same for New York City.
New York City's got a massive illegal immigrant population, mind you.
The number, I think it's a couple hundred thousand, but let's get the hard number.
That means New York City gets an extra congressional district because that's a whole district right there.
775,000, that's all you needed.
They get a whole extra district.
That means there is at least one.
Member of Congress, a Democrat who should not be in Congress, but they are, because New York brings in illegal immigrants.
And the point is, they're going to apportion it for New York City specifically, because New York City specifically has 836,000.
They're not going to say, we're going to make one district of 2 million and then have a bunch of small districts of 300,000.
That's how it works.
You get the point?
So when Republicans say we're going to change how we district these things, it makes sense, a little bit at least.
Again, nobody's perfect.
All is fair in love and war.
And I think the only real conclusion is that we are well past the point of actually making arguments as to who is right about policy.
We are now at the point with Virginia where we're basically just saying, steal the power, crush your enemy.
Where do we go next?
If the Republicans in Virginia have no voice and slowly have their rights stripped, what will they do?
They will move.
Some won't, but many will.
They will move to red areas where their rights are protected.
We're seeing this already with many different states, Texas being a great example of it.
The end result?
You have a red state that is so deep red and its neighbor is so deep blue, they are completely foreign.
It's begun.
Colorado has abortion to the point of birth elective.
A woman can walk into an abortion clinic at nine months and say, terminate the baby.
In Oklahoma, it's completely illegal.
This means that you can't get it for any reason.
They are viewing each other as completely alien.
And it's going to hyper polarize more and more because now there is no incentive in any of these states to actually.
Pander to the other side.
The one benefit, as I mentioned early on, with the ridiculous Virginia map is that creating the weird lobster means that this Democrat will still have to pander to many Republicans.
Not the diehard MAGA guys, but the moderates.
Because a primary will happen.
In the primary, the Democrats are going to have to figure out how to get as many votes as possible, and the rural areas are going to be paying attention.
Far left Democrats won't do as well as moderates who can attract Republicans.
Republican voters are going to say, listen, it's going to be a Democrat.
This is a Democrat district now, so let's just go vote in the primary.
It will cause a positive shift in that regard.
However, I'm not sure that it matters in the end because these Democrats, whether they're moderate or otherwise, are going to get into Congress in DC and vote in lockstep.
Of course, Trump's nuclear option, as I mentioned, make it a square again.
You take a look at this map and you take a look at DC right here, and you make this square and you cut off, what, half a million people?
They're now residents of DC, and these districts revert back to Republican.
DC should have remained a square.
They should not have given that land back.
I don't think Trump will actually do it, nor is there the political power to actually do it.
The end result will be those who are willing to steal power will.